Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 972
  • Posts: 16344
June 9th, 2017 at 4:13:43 PM permalink
Quote: Calder

Are those systems ever self-supporting?



I highly doubt public transportation is ever self supporting but is heavily subsidized.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
Ibeatyouraces
Ibeatyouraces
Joined: Jan 12, 2010
  • Threads: 63
  • Posts: 10694
June 9th, 2017 at 4:22:42 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

I highly doubt public transportation is ever self supporting but is heavily subsidized.


That's why regional transit here in Detroit got shot down last November. Tax payers don't want another burden. We have two systems here, DDOT and SMART and that vote would've created a third one. What they need to do is combine the two existing ones into one service.
"And that's the bottom lineeeee, cuz Stone Cold said so!"
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 972
  • Posts: 16344
June 9th, 2017 at 5:05:05 PM permalink
Quote: Ibeatyouraces

That's why regional transit here in Detroit got shot down last November. Tax payers don't want another burden. We have two systems here, DDOT and SMART and that vote would've created a third one. What they need to do is combine the two existing ones into one service.



I don't know about Detroit but in general I'd happily pay more in taxes to have a system of public transportation like they do in most of Europe.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
Ayecarumba
Ayecarumba
Joined: Nov 17, 2009
  • Threads: 206
  • Posts: 5351
June 9th, 2017 at 5:30:20 PM permalink
I seem to recall a below ground system being considered when the monorail was proposed. I don't think it was feasible because of the cost.

I think part of what makes mass transit feasible is when the stops are convenient to where people want to be. No one wants to ride a train, then have to also take a cab or bus to get where they want to go.

However, an Airport / Strip / Downtown light rail system makes a lot of sense. Let it run right down the middle of Las Vegas Blvd.

New construction, whether hotels or a stadium would be mandated to design in stops or stations.
America is all about speed. Hot, nasty, bad-ass speed. - Eleanor Roosevelt, 1936
JohnnyQ
JohnnyQ
Joined: Nov 3, 2009
  • Threads: 186
  • Posts: 2509
June 9th, 2017 at 5:57:51 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

I'd like to see the city add more buses as the ones they already have are often filled to capacity on busy days.

Yep, I gotta think that DOUBLING the # of buses on the Strip would be 1000x more cost efficient than any sort of additional monorail, above or especially BELOW ground.

Quote: MrV

but it seems to me that the best way to move people up and down the strip would be by subway, with frequent stops.

An air-conditioned, undergroung tube system would be especially appreciated by tourists when the weather gets hot, which it does for many months at a time.

I wonder why it was never designed and built?

Would you ride it if tickets were priced to pay for it over time ? $ 73 per one way ride ?
I remember the thirty-five sweet goodbyes; When you put me on the Wolverine up to Annandale; It was still September When your daddy was quite surprised; To find you with the working girls in the county jail; I was smoking with the boys upstairs when I Heard about the whole affair;I said oh no William and Mary won't do
ThatDonGuy
ThatDonGuy
Joined: Jun 22, 2011
  • Threads: 67
  • Posts: 2960
June 9th, 2017 at 6:35:40 PM permalink
It seems that all of the talk is about a subway system that just covers downtown - strip - airport, and maybe the motor speedway and the new football stadium as well.

How many other cities have a "small" subway system? San Francisco's extends 50 miles into the suburbs, and took something like 15 years just to get its initial phase done (and this doesn't include the tube that runs along the bottom of San Francisco Bay, which took another two years).

Then again, speaking of San Francisco, quite a bit of its light rail service does run underground, and in Vegas, it could be extended in pretty much every direction.
MrV
MrV
Joined: Feb 13, 2010
  • Threads: 270
  • Posts: 5556
June 9th, 2017 at 6:51:09 PM permalink
I understand that the cost of installing an underground transportation system now would probably be prohibitive, but why didn't they consider it "back in the day?"

One possible way the powers that control the Nevada purse strings could fund it would be via a quid pro quo: have the feds pick up the tab in exchange for dropping their objection to a permanent nuclear waster repository at Yucca mountain.

*not feasible, just a pipe dream*
"What, me worry?"
onenickelmiracle
onenickelmiracle
Joined: Jan 26, 2012
  • Threads: 128
  • Posts: 4831
June 9th, 2017 at 7:00:23 PM permalink
Just was thinking today after reading the thread about what to do in Vegas, besides casinos, the parking fees might be to keep people in their casinos by making having a car on vacation not worth it upfront because of the extra costs. If the average person wants to leave and go somewhere else, it will cost them to have that freedom, unless they're already paying through the nose for a high tier, but then they jeopardize that by leaving a few hours. An affordable easily used, clean and safe, transportation system is good for everyone, but the places coming their rooms expecting them to be hostages. Iirc, the monorail or whatever it is, is hardly accessible and convenient, jammed way behind the casinos. It's on the casinos not having people movers running there and back.

Public transportation I like in theory, but inconvenience and lack of options are the number one problems. For.the rest, they don't like it because they don't like being surrounded by brown people. It's a fact. Greyhound is 50% minority, Mega Bus seems like 100% white from what I've seen. That's why public support isn't there for public transportation and probably why there is a loss, white people wont use it unless they must almost. It's a loss burning all that gas, maintaining those cars, paying for them but there is more profit in divide and conquer.

I'm not intimated because I intimate not appearing to be an easy target. If I was small in stature or a woman, I might understand having fear. For public transportation to work, things need to be flipped so the general public feels stupid not using it. People are getting injured and killed every day in car accidents, safety is much about perception, nobody starts the car thinking today's the day.

Mrv is ahead of his time and in the wrong country unfortunately. Even the so called great system in Europe is being dismantled piece by piece for profits I've read and seen.
Looks like sh!t just got imaginary!
Calder
Calder
Joined: Mar 26, 2010
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 424
June 9th, 2017 at 7:23:57 PM permalink
Quote: MrV

I understand that the cost of installing an underground transportation system now would probably be prohibitive, but why didn't they consider it "back in the day?"



I suspect because back in the day the choices were:

1. Come up with a funding plan, get the cooperation of each level of government, have each property needing a subway stop to sign on, bring in heavy equipment, dig a tunnel, reroute the existing utilities as necessary, lay some tracks, then start arguing about funding going forward, or

2. Go one block east or west of the strip and lay a new roadway in the open desert.
MaxPen
MaxPen
Joined: Feb 4, 2015
  • Threads: 10
  • Posts: 1046
June 9th, 2017 at 7:54:12 PM permalink
One word

CALICHE

And as Axel pointed out, diverting the flood waters. Have a look around the Linq next time it rains a 1/4"

  • Jump to: